On Tue, 2020-12-15 at 23:18 +0100, Bean Huo wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 23:37 +0100, Bean Huo wrote:
> > > And another log generated sometime during 2021 after your change
> > > is
> > > merged:
> > > "send" <request upiu>
> > > "complete" < ****response upiu ****>
> > >
> > > The current parser won't be able to differentiate between those
> > > logs.
> > > Just change the prefix strings to be "send_req" and
> > > "complete_rsp",
> > > or something,
> > > so the parsing tools that support the new format will be able to
> > > differentiate it from the old one.
> >
> > Avri,
> > I still don't understand, this change doesn't break you current
> > parser.
> > if you still trace "send", "complete", "CDB", "query_send/complte",
> > they are still there, doesn't change. I suggest you just run on
> > your
> > system. see if there is conflict.
> >
> > Regarding your suggestion:
> > This is not problem now, we just change this definition.
> >
> > do you mean just "send" and "complete" or all?
> >
> > #define
> > UFS_CMD_TRACE_STRINGS
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_CMD_SEND, "send_req")
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_CMD_COMP, "complete_rsp")
> > \
> >
> > below also need add "req" and "rsp"?
> >
> >
> > EM(UFS_DEV_COMP, "dev_complete_rsp")
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_QUERY_SEND, "query_send")
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_QUERY_COMP, "query_complete")
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_QUERY_ERR, "query_complete_err")
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_TM_SEND, "tm_send")
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_TM_COMP, "tm_complete")
> > \
> >
> > EM(UFS_TM_ERR, "tm_complete_err")
>
>
> Hi Avri
>
> I am waiting for your answer. How can I change these strings to back-
> compatible with your tool? Tt seems only you use these strings.
>
> Thanks,
> Bean
>
Hi Avri
Before sending next version, double confirm with your. I think you
just need change:
"send" to "send_req"
"complete" to "complete_rsp"
Bean
